A99 vs D600 ISO6400 samples

Started Oct 19, 2012 | Discussions
philbot
Contributing MemberPosts: 832
Like?
Re: A99 vs D600 ISO6400 samples
In reply to mick232, Oct 20, 2012

The 5D3 is an excellent performer at high ISO in some respects, the default RAW conversions on IR have very 'nice' uniform noise that is quite pleasing to my eye.

However, if you look around the image ISO12800 vs ISO6400, there is plenty in favour of the A99 as well, there is a bunch more detail (look at the cloth swatches, the pepper oil label, the bristles on the yellow brush).. It's just the noise control isn't as good in some places (as you've shown)..

I've checked higher up the ISO range with the same 1 stop difference and it's the same story, obviously more detail in the A99 images, but well controlled noise in the 5D3...

The main thing I came away with is how awesome the FF camera's are at high ISO!

I do suspect the Sony will struggle in not presenting 'ugly' looking noise in comparison to the others..

The silly thing is, if the sensor is in the D600, even with 1/3 stop SLT loss, the noise should be able to be as 'pleasant' as the D600 at least, but Sony seem to have their own characteristics..

I'll await more studio tests, I just hope DPReview's exposures are closer then IR..

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
steven_k
Regular MemberPosts: 446Gear list
Like?
Re: A99 vs D600 ISO6400 samples
In reply to JohnBee, Oct 20, 2012

John

Nice job on the comparison, my question is in terms of overall IQ. Does the SLT mirror in anyway

hamper IQ over the D600 at base ISO?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
JohnBee
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,864
Like?
Re: A99 vs D600 ISO6400 samples
In reply to steven_k, Oct 20, 2012

steven_k wrote:

John

Nice job on the comparison, my question is in terms of overall IQ. Does the SLT mirror in anyway

hamper IQ over the D600 at base ISO?

Not that I could see. 
Both units seemed identically amazing at low ISO

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Amateur Sony Shooter
Senior MemberPosts: 5,303Gear list
Like?
Good thread, here is what I think...
In reply to JohnBee, Oct 20, 2012

A99 is about half stop noisier than d600 but in real life the difference is very small I don't think anyone bought A99 will lose sleep over it. I also think there isn't meaningful difference between A900 and A99 in terms of high ISO noise, maybe 1 stop or so, that's why I am still on the fence undecided about upgrading from A900.

 Amateur Sony Shooter's gear list:Amateur Sony Shooter's gear list
Sony RX100 Canon EOS 7D Sony SLT-A99 Sony 70-200mm F2.8 G Sony 16-35mm F2.8 ZA SSM Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* +11 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
JohnBee
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,864
Like?
Re: Good thread, here is what I think...
In reply to Amateur Sony Shooter, Oct 20, 2012

Amateur Sony Shooter wrote:

A99 is about half stop noisier than d600 but in real life the difference is very small I don't think anyone bought A99 will lose sleep over it. I also think there isn't meaningful difference between A900 and A99 in terms of high ISO noise, maybe 1 stop or so, that's why I am still on the fence undecided about upgrading from A900.

Makes sense.

This may be of interest to you: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3286761#forum-post-50102423

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Amateur Sony Shooter
Senior MemberPosts: 5,303Gear list
Like?
Re: Good thread, here is what I think...
In reply to JohnBee, Oct 20, 2012

Saw that and posted there too. I would sarecompose to A900, A99 require less NR cleaning work and noise pattern is morepleasing, so there is definitely improvement, just not as big as I hoped for (after 4 yrs).

 Amateur Sony Shooter's gear list:Amateur Sony Shooter's gear list
Sony RX100 Canon EOS 7D Sony SLT-A99 Sony 70-200mm F2.8 G Sony 16-35mm F2.8 ZA SSM Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* +11 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
GuyMcKie
Contributing MemberPosts: 534
Like?
Re: A99 vs D600 ISO6400 samples
In reply to Nordstjernen, Oct 20, 2012

With adjusted tonal curve, the a99 has a more steep contrast in the shadows and a smoother curve in the highlights, they are very close.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Maxeyesore
Regular MemberPosts: 415Gear list
Like?
Re: A99 vs D600 ISO6400 samples
In reply to Nordstjernen, Oct 21, 2012

Nordstjernen wrote:

Also, when opening raw files from different cameras with a raw converter, some adjustment is needed to equalise the results. Default is NOT a standard or "neutral" or "true" and different cameras are treated differently!

But this means the D600 could actually be at a disadvantage here on top of still having less noise. The idea that there is gap of grey area makes no difference unless you know which is getting the short end of the stick. All this means is the D600 could be even better, which would be very sad indeed considering the price difference here.

-- hide signature --

To see is to believe...PENTAX

 Maxeyesore's gear list:Maxeyesore's gear list
Sony SLT-A33 Pentax K-5 IIs
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Maxeyesore
Regular MemberPosts: 415Gear list
Like?
Re: ISO6400 isn't everything!
In reply to Nordstjernen, Oct 21, 2012

Nordstjernen wrote:


Anyhow, the SLT technology will not overcome the traditional mirror for same generation cameras when it comes to high ISO performance.

Many of us are getting the A99 for OTHER reasons than high ISO noise barely visible behind the D600 at an ISO setting that we rarely use!  

Another odd idea here, what reason would you get a a99 over a77? For sports it's a hard sell. Yes, tracking is better IF you have the lenses, but FPS is cut in half. For birding or long range shooting you are losing a lot of reach by going FF. Resolution is the same, 24mp. It would seem that the main advantage the a99 has is better noise performance due to more light gathered on a larger sensor. I am curious as to what reasons exactly so many people are interested in the a99 over a77?

-- hide signature --

To see is to believe...PENTAX

 Maxeyesore's gear list:Maxeyesore's gear list
Sony SLT-A33 Pentax K-5 IIs
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Bruce Oudekerk
Senior MemberPosts: 2,594
Like?
Re: Same noise day & night!
In reply to Nordstjernen, Oct 21, 2012

Nordstjernen wrote:

No, this is not true. Sensitivity of digital sensors is linear, so light level does NOT matter. What matters is exposure! You would get the same noise pattern for an underexposed daylit scene as for an equally underexposed night scene -- given that the same numbers of photons hits the measured area of the sensor.

You are not the first, nor the last, to point this truth out..  And of course you are correct.

There is, however, at least a glimmering of a rationale in believing otherwise, even if it is incorrect.

In dimly lit, yet properly exposed photographs, the entire histogram curve can often be significantly shifted to the dark end.  Thus a significantly greater proportion of the image lies in the noisy, shadow, areas of the picture.  More importantly, in dimly lit photographs (assuming the exposure correctly captures that dimly lit ‘look’) the likelihood is that visually important portions of the image are in this noisy marginal shadow/shade.  Thus the impression can be that the image is noisier than a brightly lit scene.  To make matters worse, often the image can exhibit extreme contrast and that pushes the dynamic range capabilities of the camera.  Since the image has been properly exposed to avoid overexposure and ‘blowing out’ the highlights, when the shadow areas are tweaked, noise becomes increasing apparent and ‘in your face’.  Here’s an example with an older KM7D camera…not that that matters:

The real culprits here are the nature of the lighting and the visual expectations we photographers bring to the fray, not how much overall light was available.  ‘Proper exposure’ determines the ‘amount of light’ that the sensor ‘sees’ at any given ISO.  The bottom line is that you are absolutely correct, but it’s easy for me to see how many photographers would make this mistake when evaluating image noise.

Bruce

...and for what its worth, editing replies in this forum...specifically the image insertion...is terrible. I have no idea how this will be done on a tablet with a touch screen.  I have little faith this will come out correctly now, even though the editing screen looks fine.

-
http://www.pbase.com/misterpixel

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ET2
ET2
Senior MemberPosts: 3,662Gear list
Like?
Re: ISO6400 isn't everything!
In reply to Maxeyesore, Oct 21, 2012

Maxeyesore wrote:

Nordstjernen wrote:


Anyhow, the SLT technology will not overcome the traditional mirror for same generation cameras when it comes to high ISO performance.

Many of us are getting the A99 for OTHER reasons than high ISO noise barely visible behind the D600 at an ISO setting that we rarely use!  

Another odd idea here, what reason would you get a a99 over a77?

That's like saying what reason someone would have buying APSC camera over 1" sensor camera. Bigger sensor.

>For sports it's a hard sell. Yes, tracking is better IF you have the lenses, but FPS is cut in half.

A99 can do 10 fps in APSC mode, if/whem higher frame rate is required.

>For birding or long range shooting you are losing a lot of reach by going FF.

No, you are not, as you can switch to APSC mode on A99 and still get 11 MP photos.

>Resolution is the same, 24mp.

True, but A99 has larger pixels, which would mean the lens would more easily resolve those 24 MP pixels.

>It would seem that the main advantage the a99 has is better noise performance due to more light gathered on a larger sensor.

Exactly, and that matters.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads